About 40 separate “school-based health centers” doled out 12,721 doses of Plan B in 2011-12, up from 10,720 in 2010-11 and 5,039 in 2009-10....
The city says about 6,300 NYC girls had unplanned pregnancies last year, and more than half had abortions. Of those who give birth, the city says, about 70 percent drop out of school, making their futures bleak.

So is this about giving liberals access to young sweet thangs risk-free, or killing off more of those troubling "darkie" babies before the pregnancies get to the more expensive Planned Parenthood stage?

All the outcry comes from the hicks out in flyover country. NYC elected Bloomberg three straight times, so it isn't like they didn't know what they were getting. People get the government they deserve.

And God forbid you get caught with a peanut butter and strawberry jam sandwich, some potato chips or.....gasp....some chocolate chip cookies. You and your Mom will have to be sent to a re-education camp.

I am a bit bothered by this. The city is providing this sort of abortifcant to girls down to maybe 14 or so without notice to or permission by their parents or guardians. And, I ask the question that has been asked so often - why are abortion and birth control the one places where the parents have no say and no right to even be notified about medical procedures on and drugs given to their minor children by the state? And what about physical complications? Presumably, the state (i.e. city here) have qualified immunity. And, ditto for emotional complications.

And, I do agree with the parents who note that these pills are more more readily given to poor minority students in an attempt to keep them from getting pregnant, and, thus, reducing their birth rate by effectively pushing abortion on these girls. Maybe not quite genocide, but getting close?

I got a call from the school nurse once when my daughter was caught with a cough drop in her pocket. I had to leave work, go to the school, and either personally remove the cough drop or sign a consent for her to have it.

But if she wanted a nurse from the city to dilate her cervix and insert a piece of plastic and metal into her uterus without my knowledge or consent--hellz yeah!

(Not really. We're not as advanced in the field of reproductive health out here in flyover land, so no super-awesome school clinics for us. We still have these funny ideas that parents should be responsible for the health decisions of their minor children).

In my niece's high school the school nurse can't even hand out an aspirin. Yet these "school-based health centers" are giving out birth control pills, inserting IUDs, and injecting Depa-provera. What's wrong with the local health clinics or the OB/GYN departments at hospitals, that they're not doing these things?

Well, they are doing these things, and there's no reason why they couldn't do them for these girls. But look at the money involved: the city launched the "school clinics" with a grant, and last year funded them to the tune of $2.7 million, plus had over $390K in birth control costs reimbursed. That works out to $77,272 per school involved.

"""What gives the mayor the right to decide, without adequate notice, to give our children drugs that..."

There is nobody in this country who had a kid on his own, nobody. You fucked and got pregnant out there, good for you. But I want to be clear, you moved your booty to the disco on the roads the rest of us paid for. You used bartenders the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your sex chair because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for.

Revenant, to be sure Plan B bothers me when it's treated like candy because we know that there are long term risks associated with the pill, abortion, and anything else that jerks your hormones around. If there are health problems it's not going to be with middleschoolers or highschoolers or college students who get it out of a vending machine... it's going to be 40 year old women with breast or ovarian cancer or infertility or something like that.

It bothers me that I'm convinced that the promoters of this "solution" deliberately ignore any potential risk to repeated or chronic Plan B use because *they* have made a value judgement that the risk is worth it. But it's not their risk.

Other than that, yes, the social issues related to sex that young and possibly encouraging more of it, or behaving as if pregnancy is the only consequence worth worrying about, yes that does worry me... but I also think that the social issues include the way we so artificially put off reproduction far past the years when it's most healthy to reproduce. Still, those are separate concerns and my concern about health risks is not a pretend concern or excuse.

And, I ask the question that has been asked so often - why are abortion and birth control the one places where the parents have no say and no right to even be notified about medical procedures on and drugs given to their minor children by the state?

Minor children may be reluctant to talk to their parents about these issues.

If they are under the legal age of consent are these pregnancies reported to the police?

"In their perverted, Babylonian way, the authorities have decided that the only bad thing about sex is that it leads to babies. They don’t care about the emotional misery and betrayal of the exploited young.

So as long as they can prevent conception, or obliterate it later with ‘morning-after pills’ and mass slaughter of the unborn, then they believe they are acting responsibly.

They also make a few feeble efforts to discourage the spread of sexual diseases.

This is the morality of the brothel-keeper throughout the ages. When the Government and the law behave like this, what is the good citizen to do? Where is he or she to turn? "

Pray for Alito, Kennedy, and Robert's health for the next four years. I have faith that Scalia and Thomas's disdain and hatred of Obama will carry them through come hell or high water. I would not put it past Scalia to have instructions in his will that he be propped up weekend at Bernie's style if necessary to hold out til 2017.

Revenant, to be sure Plan B bothers me when it's treated like candy because we know that there are long term risks associated with the pill, abortion, and anything else that jerks your hormones around.

There are rather more severe long-term consequences associated with pregnancy. :)

In fact, the hormonal consequences of pregnancy are much the same as Plan B -- just prolonged. Then you have all the other problems on top of that.

And, I ask the question that has been asked so often - why are abortion and birth control the one places where the parents have no say and no right to even be notified about medical procedures on and drugs given to their minor children by the state?

It is literally against the law for me to give so much as an aspirin to my students.

Look, if people want to argue that the girls in question should wait and have an abortion later, ok. But that isn't the goal here, is it? Heck, the fruitcake from the NYC Parent Union quoted in the article is angry because the girls in question aren't giving birth to kids of their own -- she's bitching about "population suppression" in high schools.

They're dropping out because, even if the school has day care, they're eligible for welfare, childcare, and probably rent. In one fell swoop the girl becomes an adult.

Instant adulthood is why girls had babies way back when I went to school, too.

(Adulthood has nothing at all to do with responsibility, it's status in the community, no matter how responsible or functional you may or may not be.)

In order to stay in school, even without a baby, students have to believe there is a point to it, a sure result. Those drop outs, if it's from having a baby or not, aren't *wrong* about there being no point to staying in school, are they?

There are rather more severe long-term consequences associated with pregnancy.

Estrogen-based birth control increases your risk of breast cancer.

Giving birth to a baby decreases your risk of breast cancer.

So what are the "severe long-term consequences" of a pregnancy, Rev?

Presumably you are joking about having a child. Is it a good consequence to have a baby, or is it a bad consequence?

Obama said that having a baby is a "punishment" for sex. Do you think having a baby is a punishment? Should we have negative feelings about our babies? Should we hate them? Should we make them disappear?

And one should always point out to the prophets of choice that adoption is a choice. The women, or girls, who decide to keep their babies decided to keep their babies. Do you disapprove?

After all, Sanger was all about keeping less desirable people from breeding. Voluntary eugenics. If someone feels like the real cause is less black babies, can we automatically assume she's a nut-ball?

After all, Sanger was all about keeping less desirable people from breeding.

And Hitler favored a strong national defense. And Stalin wanted government to control health care.

Now that we've gotten the guilt-by-association out of the way, let's get back to talking about people who (a) aren't long dead and (b) are actually involved here.

The specific person complaining about this policy -- the one quoted in the article -- is complaining about "population suppression". That's what most of the people in this thread are implicitly complaining about, too.

They don't care about the health of the girls in question. Hell, they don't even know how many of the girls are actually still minors. They just see convenient pawns.

The problem is dissociation of risk. In this case, it seems to arise because women do not understand where babies come from. Perhaps Bloomberg should review what passes as biology education in New York City. The people who adhere to a hedonistic philosophy, presumably inculcated in their "sexual education" classes, and promoted by political culture, have been seriously deceived about the terms of reality.

That said, treating symptoms is profitable in perpetuity. We will not address causes, and promote a better culture, until people like Bloomberg, and Obama (supporter of premeditated murder of survivors of scalpel and vacuum violence), are brought to heel.

That's what they would like us to believe. They would also like us to believe that evolutionary fitness is an article of faith. Perhaps that message is only directed to men and women who are disposable. They would like other people to accept their faith; but, so far, people seem to prefer an objective reality, even when it tends to harsh their mellow.

Many, and perhaps most, people do not seek to escape reality through consumption of psychotropic drugs, or responsibility for their voluntary behavior through "plan b" drugs, or commit human rights violations through elective abortion.

As for Bloomberg, Planned Parenthood, and the abortion industry generally, are a lucrative sector of their economy. It also serves to reorder demographics in order to shift democratic leverage. While the eugenics movement target their so-called "undesirables", the movement has since progressed to also target generational viability of their competing interests.

"The specific person complaining about this policy -- the one quoted in the article -- is complaining about "population suppression"."

If this policy applies in particular to only certain schools... is this really an automatically unsupportable claim?

"That's what most of the people in this thread are implicitly complaining about, too."

I think that there is a problem with promoting, as policy, the idea that having a child is punishment. The "social cons" don't think that girls should have babies or young women have them without fathers around, but waiting as wisdom is a far cry from birth as punishment and if you have a baby your future is dire. Babies are a good thing, and I think that most minority communities treat babies as a good thing even if we cringe at several generations of single motherhood becoming the norm... the *babies* are still seen as a good thing.

Trying to change that by insisting that having babies is a bad thing, a punishment, destroys your life, might seem like a good way to solve a problem IF YOU'RE UNWILLING TO USE MORAL ARGUMENTS, but it's logically similar to telling someone that masturbation will make you blind.

And the secondary effect is more serious because it demands a particular attitude towards babies and children in our society, that they are intrinsically undesirable persons.

But that's not the point, is it. The point is to promote behaviors which engender positive outcomes, including preserving an intrinsic value of human life. It is to promote behaviors which are positive contributors to evolutionary fitness. It is to severely curtail elective abortions in order to prevent normalization of premeditated murder in our society.

There will always be exceptions to the rule. The rule, however, must promote outcomes which engender positive progress. The ambiguous alternative we have largely experienced has made great progress to normalizing denigration of individual dignity, devaluation of human life, and evolutionary dysfunction.

The point is to develop a society where men and women are capable of self-moderating behavior and therefore eligible to enjoy liberty. Universal education promised this future; but, other than advances in technical knowledge, has largely failed to meet its objective.

So, today, we are subject to progressive involuntary exploitation and constrained liberty. A slight majority of our population elects to exchange our liberty for submission with benefits, because they dream of instant (or immediate) gratification, which their politicians promise to provide without consequences. They have been led to believe that the laws of nature are selectively applicable.

In exchange for their support, they receive an indulgence from their mortal gods in the form of redistributive change or rationalization to abort their unwanted child's life.

They prostrate themselves before their mortal gods awaiting their material reward. The modern man and woman make a degenerate spectacle of themselves as they prioritize their hedonistic desires over every other concern. There is no dignity in bowing before men and women who suffer from delusions of grandeur, hoping that they will dissociate you from risk (i.e. life) and provide for your mental and physical well-being.

Of course teens desire sex, they would just fall in love and get married. That option isn't available to them. Society denies them that and makes it impossible to have mental maturity match physical maturity.

Sex is now just pointless, when you're bored with nothing to interest you.

Why are 11-15 year olds having sex? It wouldn't have anything to do with our degenerate Hollywood/entertainment industry culture would it?It wouldn't have anything to do with the inescapable cultural rot and our failing, dismal public education system?

"Of course teens desire sex, they would just fall in love and get married. That option isn't available to them. Society denies them that and makes it impossible to have mental maturity match physical maturity."

It's messed up.

Biology wants us to pair up when biology decides it's time to pair up. But because society thinks it knows better, that pairing up happens without the first or last thought about how dependable or trustworthy the other person might be, only attraction and fun and if you're *lucky* serial relationships instead of suddenly realizing that you've spent 15 years with a childish jerk because you never once asked yourself "Do I want to be married to this person?"

this is almost a repeat of my comment on the school board claiming ownership of any apps created by teachers or kids--Who can dispute the fact that in a Democratic People's Republic, the Party owns its subjects, and that their bodies belong to the Party? just as in a slave regime, anything involving the slave is the owner's?Remember how we used to be free?

this is almost a repeat of my comment on the school board claiming ownership of any apps created by teachers or kids--Who can dispute the fact that in a Democratic People's Republic, the Party owns its subjects, and that their bodies belong to the Party? just as in a slave regime, anything involving the slave is the owner's?Remember how we used to be free?

this is almost a repeat of my comment on the school board claiming ownership of any apps created by teachers or kids--Who can dispute the fact that in a Democratic People's Republic, the Party owns its subjects, and that their bodies belong to the Party? just as in a slave regime, anything involving the slave is the owner's?Remember how we used to be free?

I don't know about this waiting for marriage idea. I've been waiting for 40 years. Don't count on it kids. Sometimes Mrs. Right gets pregnant to some asshole, and you end up sitting around commenting on a blog like a loser on Superbowl Sunday instead of cuddling with her on the couch with a couple beers and a pot full of chicken soup.

I'm making chicken soup in my crock pot right now, so actually you can still have that.

This is a stupid policy. But most of you whiners here want the government to ban abortions. The fact that you want the government involved in a decision like this in any form is wrong. If you want to reduce the number of abortions is the government really the right tool? Is it better than Christ?

This is also a blaring commercial for privatizing education and letting parents get their kids out of these festering ratholes.

Disappointed to see Revenant's libertarianism embrace government-funded and -administered contraception without the consent or even notice of the parents.

I am aware that teenagers have sex and get pregnant. Neither their progeny nor their prophylactics should be on the taxpayer dime, and the government should not be letting my teenagers have things that I decided they ought not to have. My rights as a parent are violated by the state and I am amazed that Revenant does not see this.

I personally would be buying contraception for my own teenagers, btw. But that is my right, and it is my right not to. And it is wrong that I have to pay for other people's.

Things have come to a pass where in California a teenage girl cannot use a tanning bed or get a tattoo without her parent's written consent, but she can get a tax-payer funded abortion without them even being notified. Can we all agree that is messed up?

But what happened to the girls who took Plan B? There can be bad physical, psychological, etc. consequences from taking that drug and I hope that someone is tracking that too. And its crazy to think that a large soft drink is so harmful that it can't be sold but that Plan B can be dispensed without any medical supervision or follow up.